Everybody a breeder ?

[GMT]

To this day, you, nor anybody else can name a single one of those things, can you... Listen and listen good, the only thing you're losing by throwing the Y away is the wasted time you incur by not doing so. Otherwise school me.

a) I dont like playing with electricity, and silver is getting pricey.
b) even the seeded plants give me a little smoke so I'm not spraying it with poison.
c) why would I want a population that if I want to breed it without polluting the work I've done ie reintroducing genes I may not want, I have to go against a or b?

 

[mexcurandero420]

Outstanding bob, not stupid, very astute. A black guy and a blonde haired white chick (f1) will almost inveriably give rise to black hair, brown eyes, and ect, this is refered to as complete dominance (or mendelian genetics). But if two of those mate we'll see blonde haired afros and geen eyes in a percentasge of the population, and that is where it gets interesting. Now, most of those individuals will be the products of additivity/codominance and etc, but some will breed true (be homozygous aa or AA) for those traits. Our job is to seek out these individuals, for they are exceptional breeding material. Take many shots at what is there in the f2 and beyond, and we will hit our target sooner or later. This is all just maths.

But what if you have a white guy with blue eyes and styling hair and a woman with grey blue eyes with styling hair which gets 2 children (F1) with one curly hair and green eyes and the other styling hair and green eyes too, just like in my family. The outcome can sometimes be a surprise, although you doing math in theory.

Keep on growing

 

[GMT]

wiki has a good piece on the inheritance and evolution of eye colour. though somewhat off topic it does show what we are talking about quite nicely. Worth looking up if you can be arsed.

 

[speckledbuds]

So here is a question, correct me if I'm wrong.

Haze, basically four crosses (maybe more) in one. Very diverse I was thinking the person maybe favorite having a diverse set of genes to work with.

Skunk, very stable inbreed line through many generations and selections to create

These two together have been great and seen in many different forms and inbreed alot.
Perhaps it's time to create a much more diverse gene set, using these large numbers that some report able and capable of doing. Inbreeding, enveloping, can be done in aggregating of the seed market, by consumers etc looking to create their own stable lines.

The larger runners coul take as much genes as available and create an unstable but diverse gene pool that everyone could grab from as well to find the next haze, or poly hybrid that could be the secret sauce in many stable lines. Sounds good?

 

[idiit]

the proof is in the puddin'. show me the text book academic mendelian propagated strains that have actually been reproducible over time in cannabis. if a pollen chuck can produce excellent results and if you've kept the parents of "pollen chuck" viable and reproducible then what is the advantage of an antiquated cumbersome mendelian style approach?

i'm no authority. i've done a lot of reading on different strains and basically the old 1980's grail strains from my personal experience and reading seem played out for the most part and growers are forced to run many #'s hunting for the special phenos.

my decision was to go back to the start of all dutch strains (man bred) which is landraces (nature bred). i look for different special attributes such as high effects, potency, terpenes, frost, hardiness, yield, flowering time, bud structure. i can cross special landraces into dutch genetics ( crippy, crippi ) or i can do poly landrace hybrids.

i was around in the 80's and i never saw tolerance build up issues in any of the imported well cured ( by the time they got to market) landraces. the landraces were very powerful, had magnificent high effects and no tolerance build up issues.

i see it exactly the way tom is posting as being the truth. man worked strains for yield, hermie free, potency, frost, etc. is not the same as the overly cumbersome mendelain approach.

until someone can start posting some strains that have stood up over considerable time utilizing the fancy pants approach then there is no evidence that the hard way is superior over utilizing superior seed/clone parents and mating special phenos. feming makes this all the more doable.

another thought on the matter; did dj really pre envision a strain that looked, smelled, tasted like blueberry and have a very potent enjoyable high with good duration to boot? no. probably not. dj is a great breeder. no doubt. but what probably really happened is that nature decided, not man's preconceptions.


get some kens and some barbies. let them fuck in private. barbie gets knocked up and we know who the daddy is. we keep clones or seed stock of the kens and barbies viable. we check out the kids. some are going to be magnificent. we go from there. this is a non ego centric approach to easy to create magnificent easily reproducible over time strains.

show me the mendelain style strains that produce better results than the "ken does barbie" repeatable approach outlined above!

 

[offthehook]

When everyone resorts to large number, 'survival of the fittest' inbreed breeding, somebody somewhere will find something usefull to suit ones need.

Cannabis genomes remain in collective infinite progress.

No one can claim her his own.

(As in Maroccon style seed/hash producing land races.)

 

[FOE20]

So where is a chart to counter that Mendel chart? and create that bane for others?...Maybe to complex to able to be created?,...seems theres a few minds here that could do it..pull up ur over all's and give it a shot Tom...as it would be very useful and save you lots of time and frustration as well maybe...

as said my work will speak for itself as its done with a open mind and kind heart..not much for text books and workflow...more just going with the flow ad learning along the way...
I'll keep to my own head and avoid over-lords and text books but thnx...applied and analog still work just fine...I pref to keep it Raw..
and I consider myself a Renaissance Hippy actually...but who knows anyone on here really...
but you know there is a way to tell...Run the same line made by diff folk against each other....proof is always in the pudding...not always in the directions or the "descriptions"..

I dont follow that chart...its a outline for a theory at best IMO...but at least its useful..
but the insults and belittling make it a long read for a thread...keep rollin
FOE20

 

[Tonygreen]

Lets all chip in and buy a private island with enough farmland to beat the math.

 

[mapinguari]

its hard to keep your cool at times when repeating something you've written about time and time again and the message still doesn't get through. Just bear in mind Tom's been writing this stuff for years, over and over again.

Thanks for the Bodhisattvas who have the patience to repeat themselves until some of us finally begin to get it.

Tom, keep using the Pink example to explain incomplete dominance and related meta-Mendelian ideas, it works well.

 

[HidingInTheHaze]

It seems like when it comes to cannabis breeding there is a few different schools of thought.

1. Genetic Preservation/Refinement
Using wild genetics, large populations to preserve or polish the gene pool. Taking the good with the bad for the sake of preserving as much of the gene pool as possible or taking something raw and creating something beautiful.

2. Making "Dank" plants
Using already refined genetics, smaller populations and breeding for visible/ easily identifiable characteristics, i.e color, smell, resin production, size, height, yield, quality of high etc...to appeal to growers and smokers.
I find this to be the most common style and the most artistic, because this is where the beauty is in the eye of the beholder, less about rules and more about going in directions that interest you.

3. Making medicine.
Using large populations of refined or wild genetics. Breeding for the unseen qualities like individual cannabinoids. This is out of the realm of most amateurs as it would require laboratory procedure and scientific and genetic testing of all plants within the pool.

4. Seed hawking.
No integrity, throwing together random genetics, being untruthful of parental lineage, basically just throwing junk seed out there to make money and/or to capitalize on hype.

Basically anybody can breed plants but not everybody can be considered a breeder. And within the cannabis cultivation scene "breeder" seems to be a badge of honor bestowed by the community to a respected person, that has book knowledge and working knowledge of the plant species, gardening skills and has a proven track record of producing quality crosses and lines, regardless of which school of breeding they work in.

 

[Lemon Larry]

Thanks

Thanks

i just want to say a big Thank you ! to all the breeders !
i luv cannabis, and i really appericate every thing they are doing
shareing this amazeing plant and all thier hard work

PS i just wish tom hill would spend less time edujucateing
and more time bring some real RKS to the table, WTF ever
happened to that ?

 

[OLDproLg]

Poor TOM,frustrations?....understood!

Well FOE,you got me i think on the DOM thing?
i rethought that right after posting an said FUCK!

You said something really important:knowing the pheno types in each strain
family gene pool.....Helps 10 fold to KNOW what your looking for from experience!
Experience is what i have with many BIG pools,but the confusing part is after you
sellect on your best visual selections still inbreeding throws more variation in the mix??
f1,is probly the only part any strain maybe stable for,an have a few pheno's visually.
that chart you made?
F1=50
F2=75
F3=85 or what ever you had,looks COOL but in all reality its not that way?

Say you had skunk#1 seed and are growing in HUGE numbers!

ANd i have skunk#1 seed and are growing in HUGE numbers!

No matter what we our sellecting different pheno's,
and our final product would definatly be different.......
You chose for this?
i chose for that??....even with a stable SK1 pool.

The best SEED MAKING aproach is only in the F1,after that all hell combined????
and remixed an combined again in F3's good god the pheno's in f3's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let me tell yaz what kind of smells and flavors are in MY SK#1 f3's.............
Sweet coconut beach lotion...is what i chose for initially????
Sweet lemon...extrodinary pheno just a JEWEL!!!
sweet pinapple...cut a pinapple and stick it in your face!!!!...both 1 in 500 to 200?
sweet hazy

Peppery
earthy
floral
diesel
tart
hashy

Out of these just a few are outstanding and have been kept by many breeders!

Now speaking of S1,selfed an example of what i had in 3 cheese
S2 seeds=3pheno's
1 classic skunk RKill flavor with WAY MORE VIGOUR!!!..an better high!
2 blueberry all the way to the BANK,i got my bb back...
3 cherry cheese cake,slightly cherry slightly classic cheese!

Not shure what the hell would be NEXT,in S3 an behond even?

KNowing what to look for IS half the battle.........
and the only way to do so is in HUGE NUMBERS to be SHURE!!!
good luck doing that.....

Quite a thread their silva!~

 

[purple_man]

high fambz!

nice write up, and good olfactorial observations k+. now think about what you observed and put it in relation to "a stabilzed line as skunk#1" as mentioned above... how come in the 3rd filial generation you still find MANY deviations of the coconut oil scent??? welcome to the world of polyhybrids...

thats why folks select a mother and asexually propagate certain chemovars...

blessss

 

[OLDproLg]

^^HEY!

Because the 3rd filial gen that YOU THOUGHT WERE THE ONES,
wernt the ones or just combined ulocked genes to pop up way more frequent???
imjust sayin,even a pro has hard times tryin to stabilize the unseen genes.

THats what i talk about when i said"1 seed an 1 chain"those hidden genes within
1 chain sometimes pop up,myself i love f2,f3's they are NOT ant less potent just MORE!

To me if a seed maker has 1 good male and he knows how it lends to others!
an 1 good female and know how she lends trait,an together just a few pheno's
are gonna be more like 5 different pheno's......
Example:
#1 pheno in the cross is the one that blended both P1 parents best,without loosin
anythings desired....
#2 this pheno is most like the 1 parent say either the male or female P1 on one
side of the spectrom..

#3 this pheno is twards the OTHER side male or female P1

#4 is closer to the #2 in pheno type

#5 is closer to the#3 pheno type

1.2.3.4.5 if they lined up like this #3 is the best cross blended plant,if you looked
at the plants this way the #1 would be the male and #5 is the female an 3 is what
plant we went for and hopefully got?....

THen again if you had dutch passion BB it would be much much different....
1.2.3.4.5.6.7 in F1's....but i like alot of plants in that gene pool LOVE BB!!!!!
Got it back threw S2 ing cheese,an thats COOL to say the least..even the HIGH matches!
You never know what is HIDDEN in any gene pool,so if a dude finds som'm cool
clones bXed to seed form WITH VIGOUR that is the best it gets.....

Ranble ramble fizzzz fizzzzz!

 

[OLDproLg]

Pic!

Pic!

DP BB!!!!

Dont hate on DP i know they had BIG PROBS germing an runts too???
BUT on the good side,Exccccelent keeper to be had,CRYSTAL BOMBS!

 

[speckledbuds]

So I take it no one has been doing this style of inbeeding

skunk #1 "pineapple" x outcross to HUGE different genepool females
skunk #1 "earthy" x outcross to HUGE different genepool females
skunk #1 "piney" x outcross to HUGE different genepool females

Now record which crosses progeny combine to remake a "pineapple" skunk or whatever example you use. Then write down those parents for a possible dominate pineapple trait for all cannabis for future generations of people that really care about locking down each gene. Perhaps one day we can have a discussion at the level of "strain name" produces this result because we know this of the gene pool because of the open population testing we did to find dominate traits in the biggest gene pool possible. Until that day comes there will be guile in the numbers. It's really about finding an approach that produces a win-win situation instead of a win-lose game, or worse the blame game. Who cares about who screwed what pooch where, it's about what can be done and moving forward. If people are keeping data that isn't in books, that they themselves were doing research with then that should be made publicly available.

 

[purple_man]

sorry bro, it's hard for me to understand what you are saying... anyways good luck...

hate on who? dp? henk and them boys who ripped off dj??? no sir... henk and them boys shall keep on hackin it till the wheels fall off

also, don't hate on the "runts" in dj's work... they are linked to the thai side of life... most time those putas are the keepers... for more info check dj's subforum bro!

blessss
ps.: for fuqs sake, can we please stop this small talk???

pps.: chuck norris does not breed... he roundhouse kicks male c. sativa and forces them boys to fuq everything else -> pollen chuck-ing

 

[purple_man]

*to fuq everything else up

 

[OLDproLg]

Right,i know the story....

But if Henk,got the blueberrry and f2,f3'ed them
what you think he finds.......all kinds of variations....
THen you pick a winner and bx a few times,strained.

Yes i understand what he^^ says,and that would be correct!
If you chose say pine' and the seeded to another type and got pine
in 50% or more in 1 cross YES that pine trait came out on top really!!

i did this with short Leda x c99pineapple.....the short LEDA won!!!
She gave her greasy lemon smell and short structure first cross.....
THat all depends on strains,see the Leda is a wilder sativa/stronger vigour
an the c99 weaker by far........i knew who was going to WIN!!
For i have looked threw hundreds of the gene pools to recognize what from what??
the vigour in c99 has been deminished as much of the lines these days....
Peace an good seed buying!
Lg

 

[Tonygreen]

What do you think of this from Chimera?

Chimera
Cannabis Researcher

Chimera

Idea Hi Beast

You've just discovered the biggest myth (IMNSHO) of marijuana breeding- it is a mistake that almost EVERYONE makes (including many of the most respected breeders!).

Backcrossing will not stabilize a strain at all- it is a technique that SHOULD be used to reinforce or stabilize a particular trait, but not all of them.

For eg- G13 is a clone, which I would bet my life on is not truebreeding for every, or even most traits- this means that it is heterozygous for these traits- it has two alleles (different versions of a gene). No matter how many times you backcross to it, it will always donate either of the two alleles to the offspring. This problem can be compounded by the fact that the original male used in the cross (in this case hashplant) may have donated a third allele to the pool- kinda makes things even more difficult!

So what does backcrossing do?
It creates a population that have a great deal of the same genes as the mother clone. From this population, if enough plants are grown, individuals can be chosen that have all the same traits as the mother, for use in creating offspring that are similar (the same maybe) as the original clone.
Another problem that can arise is this- there are three possiblities for the expression of a monogenic (controlled by one gene pair) trait.

We have dominant, recessive, and co-dominant conditions.

In the dominant condition, genotypically AA or Aa, the plants of these genotypes will look the same (will have the same phenotype, for that trait).

Recessive- aa will have a phenotype

Co-dominant- Aa- these plants will look different from the AA and the aa.

A perfect example of this is the AB blood types in humans:

Type A blood is either AA or AO
Tybe B blood is either BB or BO
Type AB blood is ONLY AB
Type O blood is OO.

In this case there are three alleles (notated A, B, and O respectively).

If the clone has a trait controlled by a co-dominat relationship- ie the clone is Aa (AB in the blood example) we will never have ALL plants showing the trait- here is why:

Suppose the clone mother is Aa- the simplest possibility is that the dad used contributes one of his alleles,
let us say A. That mean the boy being use for the first backcross is either AA or Aa. We therefore have two possibilties:

1) If he is AA- we have AA X Aa- 50% of the offspring are AA, 50% are Aa. (you can do the punnett square to prove this to yourself).

In this case only 50% of the offspring show the desired phenotype (Aa genotype)!

2) If the boy being used is Aa- we have Aa X Aa (again do the punnett square) this gives a typical F2 type segregation- 25% AA, 50% Aa, and 25% aa.
This shows that a co-dominant trait can ONLY have 50% of the offspring showing the desired trait (Aa genotype) in a backcross.

If the phenotype is controlled by a dominant condition- see example #1- all 100% show the desired phenotype, but only 50% will breed true for it.

If the phenotype is controlled by a recessive condition- see example #2- only 25% will show the desired phenotype, however if used for breeding these will all breed true if mated to another aa individual.

Now- if the original dad (hashplant) donates an 'a' allele, we only have the possibilities that the offspring, from which the backcross boy will be chosen, will be either Aa or aa.
For the Aa boy, see #2.
For the aa boy (an example of a test cross, aa X Aa) we will have:
50% aa offspring (desired phenotype), and 50% Aa offspring.

Do you see what is happening here? Using this method of crossing to an Aa clone mother, we can NEVER have ALL the offspring showing the desired phenotype! Never! Never ever ever! Never!! LOL

The ONLY WAY to have all the offspring show a Aa phenotype is to cross an AA individual with an aa individual- all of the offsrping from this union will be the desired phenotype, with an Aa genotype.

Now, all of that was for a Aa genotype for the desired phenotype. It isn't this complicated if the trait is AA or aa. I hope this causes every one to re-evaluate the importance of multiple backcrosses- it just doesn't work to stabilize the trait!

Also- that was all for a monogenic trait! What if the trait is controlled by a plygenic interaction or an epistatic interaction- it gets EVEN MORE complicated. AARRGH!!!!

Really, there is no need to do more than 1 backcross. From this one single backcross, as long as we know what we are doing, and grow out enough plants to find the right geneotypes, we can succeed at the goal of eventually stabilizing most, if not all of the desired traits.

The confusion arises because we don't think about the underlying biological causes of these situations- to really understand this, we all need to understand meiosis.

We think of math-eg 50% G13, 50% hashplant

Next genertion 50% G13 x 50% g13hp or (25% G13, 25%HP)

We interpret this as an additive property:
50% G13 + 25% G13 +25% HP = 75% G13 and 25% hashplant

This is unfortuneately completely false- the same theory will apply for the so called 87.%% G13 12.5% HP next generation, and the following 93.25% G13, 6.25% HP generation; we'd like it to be true as it would make stabilizing traits fairly simple, but it JUST DOESN'T work that way. The above is based on a mathematical model, which seems to make sense- but it doesn't- we ignore the biological foundation that is really at play.

I hope this was clear, I know it can get confusing, and I may not have explained it well enough- sorry if that is the case, I'll try to clear up any questions or mistakes I may have made.

Have fun everyone while making your truebreeding varieties, but just remember that cubing (successive backcrosses) is not the way to do it!
-Chimera